It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Golliwoggs: How are they offensive?

page: 3
2
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 09:15 AM
link   
reply to post by Death_Kron
 


The blackboard thing is stupid and not universal. Mandated by a few idiots who have nothing better to do.

Police Man/Fire Man make no sense these days as they are staffed by men and women. Not aware of any legislation which prevents you using those terms if you prefer to though.



CX

posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 09:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Death_Kron
reply to post by CX
 


The UK's gone mad! We have the following modifications to our language due to some bunch of PC idiots:

Blackboard = Markerboard/Chalkboard

Police man = Police Officer

Fire Man = Fire Officer

Minds gone blank, I can only think of the three at the minute...


What makes me laugh, is that the schools don't have blackboards now because of this, but "whiteboards" instead.


Should i get the white kids in the school to start rioting now? Even the black people i know thought it was pathetic.

Jeez......you couldn't make up some of the crap our governments decide.

CX.



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 09:20 AM
link   
If u look back to my post I had to edit it and it shows the reason as to why it was banned. The golliwog came about from a childrens book that was demeaning to black people.



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 09:20 AM
link   
reply to post by phoenix103
 


I don't think there is any leglislation that prevents you from saying Police man or Police women.

It was in an article I read a while back regarding changes to language to make them more PC friendly.

They idea was it was discriminatory to say police man when we now have women in the police so the term to use is police officer. They didnt want people to say police women because that could be interpretted as being discriminatory towards police men!

Absolutely backwards.



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 09:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by CX

Originally posted by Death_Kron
reply to post by CX
 


What makes me laugh, is that the schools don't have blackboards now because of this, but "whiteboards" instead.


Should i get the white kids in the school to start rioting now? Even the black people i know thought it was pathetic.

Jeez......you couldn't make up some of the crap our governments decide.

CX.


Yeah I know mate, its ridiculous!

I've thought that myself about the whiteboards, its kind of funny in a way



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 09:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by loner007
If u look back to my post I had to edit it and it shows the reason as to why it was banned. The golliwog came about from a childrens book that was demeaning to black people.


Although not always the most reliable source, wikipedia suggests otherwise:


The 1895 book included a character named the "Golliwogg", who was first described as "a horrid sight, the blackest gnome", but who quickly turned out to be a friendly character, and is later attributed with a "kind face"


Source



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 09:27 AM
link   
This is how an observer from another planet would see it, in my opinion:

They'd see a 'white' doll. It would have pink cheeks, blue eyes maybe, some wisps of brown or red or blonde or dark hair. It would have a nose and a mouth. It would probably be wearing clothes.

They'd see an Asian doll. It would have black hair, light skin, slanted eyes, and would probably have bobbed hair or perhaps pulled up in a top-knot with perhaps a skewer through the top-knot. And most likely it would be dressed in a kimono or similar

They'd see an Hawaiian dolly. It would have lovely tanned skin and glossy hair. Very probably it would be dressed in a grass skirt and very probably would have little leis at wrist, ankle and around it's neck, with a flower garland on its head

They'd see a Scottish doll. It would be dressed in a tartan kilt and Tam o Shanter, with probably a sporran and white ruffled shirt, knee-length tartan stockings and if it were a more expensive type, it would have a bag-pipe tucked under its arm

They'd see an Inuit (or Eskimo as we used to refer to them) and it would have a fur jacket and hood, slanted eyes, tanned skin, puffy leggings, and very probably some tools hanging from its belt

They'd see a Negro doll and it would have larger lips, round eyes, dark skin, very curly hair and may be dressed in conventional clothing or perhaps a little jerkin top and contrasting trousers

And the observer from the other planet would say perhaps, 'How quaint these earthlings are .. they create representations of all people on their planet as well as representations of deities and flowers and animals and just about everything that lives on their planet. Wonder why ? Oh .. wait .. they give them to their children as toys, in order they may invent various scenarios according to their individual imaginations, possibly to prepare themselves for life ahead, or even to treasure as their little friends '.

And that's all it is. And it's all it was, until it was blown out of all proportion and misinterpreted.

If it could be claimed that children were singling out the Asian dolly or the Scottish dolly and ripping them apart, or torturing them, or 'discriminating' against them by excluding them from the doll-house, then maybe we might build a case about how they or the Hawaiian dolly or the Golliwog were suffering from 'racist attacks'. But that doesn't happen. It never happened. They're just dolls. Or perhaps people of negroid extraction would prefer that instead of Golliwogs, the 'black' dollies should have worn bright and striking loin-cloths and worn a necklace of bones and had a spear set in their little hands ?


CX

posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 09:32 AM
link   
reply to post by St Vaast
 


Great comment.


It's the adults that balls everything up as usual.

They should let the under 5's run the world IMO, i never once heard a little one utter a racist comment about their friend who has a different colour skin.

They are just happy with the personality, not what colour they are.

CX.



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 09:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Death_Kron
 


The UK seems to be some sort of testing ground by tptb to determine how much control and rules and regulations the people will tolerate before eventually losing it !!!

As you say "golliwog" is just a word.
So is dwarf.
etc,etc.
The list is endless.

The end game behind all this PC lunacy has to be control.
Why do we conform to the madness ??
What is wrong with everyone ??

Maybe we should all try getting hold of a Golly and displaying it with pride in a highly visible place-----see how many of us get arrested for being in possession of an offensive childrens doll


and have'nt they had to change the words to "baa-baa black sheep " in nursery schools ???
Why---sheep can be black for heavens sake !!!
Not all goddam sheep are white.

The lunatics sure are running this asylum



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 09:44 AM
link   
I stand by my assesment because I know that we should be above this petty squabbling. They are dolls depicting characters. Should I be mad at a Hobbit doll because it depicts little people? No.

Just because some bad apples twist something into a negative doesn't make it so. We know the story, we know the doll is from that story. We know the doll maker made the dolls for that reason, so we shouldn't be upset when 'some' people twist it, we know the truth. None of my 'black' friends were offended by this.



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 10:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by CX
reply to post by St Vaast
 


Great comment.


It's the adults that balls everything up as usual.

They should let the under 5's run the world IMO, i never once heard a little one utter a racist comment about their friend who has a different colour skin.

They are just happy with the personality, not what colour they are.

CX.


Well my best friend used to be half cast and I once called him a "big, brown smelly monster" but I was only 5/6!



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 10:15 AM
link   
reply to post by phoenix103
 





Sure but the distinction based on skin colour alone is racist. If these dolls existed in all colours there wouldn't be a problem.

I can't seem to get my tiny mind around that, i don't actually know but I would assume that in a predominantly dark skinned country dolls would be blackish.

if a few white dolls appeared on the market there that were white, would this be considered racists ?

I've yet to see (I must live in a shoe lol) a Chinese /japanese mongol doll, but if they suddenly popped up are they considered racist ?


I don't know, it all seems a bit "Not the mouth it comes out of but the mind it goes into" to me.


CX

posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 10:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by Death_Kron

Originally posted by CX
reply to post by St Vaast
 


Great comment.


It's the adults that balls everything up as usual.

They should let the under 5's run the world IMO, i never once heard a little one utter a racist comment about their friend who has a different colour skin.

They are just happy with the personality, not what colour they are.

CX.


Well my best friend used to be half cast and I once called him a "big, brown smelly monster" but I was only 5/6!


Lol, kids do say what they see sometimes don't they.


My little one once made up shoe boxes full of goodies to send out to the kids in Ethiopia, it was a school charity thing. My little one was 4 at the time.

The next week we were in town and she saw a little black girl waiting for the toilet in the shopping centre, and my little one asked me, "Shall i go and ask her if she got my shoebox?"


Innocence is golden.....however like i said, that soon changes thanks to the idiots we have in power...if we let it.


CX.

[edit on 20/8/09 by CX]



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 10:17 AM
link   
reply to post by uk today
 




But do you see the underlying message ?

Can't say 'black' board

Can't say 'black sheep'


Why ?


Isn't this PC hypersensitivity to 'black' implying that 'black' is somehow 'bad' ... SO 'bad' that we won't say it -- and we'll pretend that's because 'black' people might not like it. Because being 'black' must FEEL so bad (meaning WE'd feel bad if WE were black) that we feel SORRY for them and so we stupidly emphasise their 'blackness' by deliberately going out of our way not to mention it -- thereby confirming we really DO think being black is awful ?

That's what PC speech does. I can't be the only one who's noticed it.

PC speech is a twisted way of insulting people whilst at the same time pretending to be SO concerned about them and about not insulting or offending them.



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 10:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Death_Kron
reply to post by Acidtastic
 



I have a problem with th fact that you still use the 70s term for black people. "coloured" which has implications to colour. And implies that they white is normal, and everyone else is "coloured" from white. I realise that you probably didn't mean it like that, but that's what that means these days. If you wanna say black person, then say black person


I hate this way of thinking! Anyone who isn't white is technically coloured in comparision, its as simple as that. I don't mean that in a racist manner and I'm not really sure how someone could interpret it as such, I don't mean you specifically I mean anyone.

Let me ask you a question; what do you call the opposite of a white board?


As for the term gollywog, it's been pointed out that it is an offensive term. And that's all there is to it. It's racism. Pure and simple. I can't speak for black people, but even I feel uncomfortable seeing stuff like that. It's needless in this day and age, where we should get to the point that there is only 1 race. The human race. And skin colour or cultural differences are that and that alone. Diffeerences in human kind. Not seperate races.


The term maybe racist but the doll is just a doll!

[edit on 20/8/09 by Death_Kron]

[edit on 20/8/09 by Death_Kron]
Sorry, going to have to get into semantics now


To say coloured is to say that white is normal, and anything else ISNT normal. Which is why it isn't an acceptable term of descrpition. I know that most people don't use it with that intent, but if you're on the other side of it, it's quite offensive.

I agree with you on a doll being a doll. But people are also people, and twist things to suit their own agenda.

And I call a black board a black board. Not a coloured board. Just as i'd call a black person a black person. Becasue they're not coloured, they're black!


It's not rocket science. It's having a little understanding on what a few hundred years of oppression and racism can do to ones feelings.


Edit, this link will explain the racist connetations behind the golliwog.
www.golliwogg.co.uk...

edit again, and after reading it, I learnt a few new things. Yes, it's racist


[edit on 20/8/2009 by Acidtastic]

[edit on 20/8/2009 by Acidtastic]



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 10:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Acidtastic
 



I honestly thought the term was 'African American'. I understood that .. I got it .. and it doesn't refer to colour at all. It's what I prefer. But then I'm not African American, so maybe it's offensive too .. don't know



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 10:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by St Vaast
reply to post by Acidtastic
 



I honestly thought the term was 'African American'. I understood that .. I got it .. and it doesn't refer to colour at all. It's what I prefer. But then I'm not African American, so maybe it's offensive too .. don't know

Like I was trying to say, the majority of people don't make the connection, and are using the term becasue they think it's the correct term, and not something that's offensive. But wether or not someone's ment it to be offensive or not, doesn't take the fact away that to some, it most certainly is. I guess it's a hard one to call when you're not on the recieving end of the abuse or the hurt feelings. I'm always picking my partner up on it. He does it now to wind me up


edit- I'm refering to the term coloured, not African American. As far as i'm aware, that is perfectly ok. (someone feel free to correct me on that)

[edit on 20/8/2009 by Acidtastic]



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 11:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Acidtastic

Originally posted by St Vaast
reply to post by Acidtastic
 



I honestly thought the term was 'African American'. I understood that .. I got it .. and it doesn't refer to colour at all. It's what I prefer. But then I'm not African American, so maybe it's offensive too .. don't know

Like I was trying to say, the majority of people don't make the connection, and are using the term becasue they think it's the correct term, and not something that's offensive. But wether or not someone's ment it to be offensive or not, doesn't take the fact away that to some, it most certainly is. I guess it's a hard one to call when you're not on the recieving end of the abuse or the hurt feelings. I'm always picking my partner up on it. He does it now to wind me up



Agree with you that the most well-intentioned terminology can still deliver the full sting, in a myriad situations. For example, my daughter when describing someone might say, 'Oh he's not young. He's pretty old. About 45 .. 50 '. Or, someone might say, 'Yuuuuuk .. there's nothing worse than a skinny bird with no boobs'. These aren't meant to insult anyone present, but of course, if you're aged 45 to 50 or older, or are skinny and flat chested, there are very likely to be some burning hot red cheeks and feelings of mortification. Not intended. But still hurts.

Or, the sentences which contain: ' Not that there's anything wrong with old cars .. I hope you don't think I was referring to yours' .. or perhaps, ' Ooops, I hope you didn't think I was talking about you when I said I hate beige walls '. But for someone with an old car or whose home is wall to wall beige, it feels like a slap in the face.

We've all suffered from the unintentional slight (and many intentional ones). And if we choose, we can take offence. Our hurt can (if we allow it) emerge in the huffy response or even, 'Well thanks very much. I've never been so insulted in my life ! '. Many friendships and relationships have been destroyed by a few words. Words which the utterer would wish to retract and which the recipient would wish never to have heard.

But most of us know, when all's said and done, when something has been said to deliberately hurt and when it's just been the result of momentary lack of thought .. called 'lack of tact'.

It can be summed up best by those very wise words, 'It's not what happens to you that matters .. it's how you choose to react to it'. Something like that.

Or maybe, 'Take responsibility for your own emotions '. Nope, still not the best way to express it, but that's the gist of it anyway.

We can decide, choose, to be hurt. Sure. Our choice.

Or, we can choose not to LET it hurt us. Especially when we know it wasn't intentional, wasn't said maliciously.

However, if we have a chip on our shoulder -- if we're seething with resentment -- if we've grown addicted to sympathy or if we're simply naturally self-pitying or perhaps tend to blame others for our situation in life, then we're going to use our ace-card (be that physical, economic, race or other) to feed our own need and at the same time make someone else feel 'guilty' for 'upsetting' us. We've all done it at some time in our life. And it feels good, sometimes, sure. It gives us power and control for a few moments. In the long-run of course, we stunt our own development and destroy a lot of relationships and opportunities.

We all have crosses to bear. Colour is such an obvious one of course and can be so usefully exploited .. and is .. from both sides of the fence.



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 12:49 PM
link   
reply to post by St Vaast
 


You say we can't say words such as "Blackboard" and "Black sheep"---

Well yes we can---nobody is going to stop me using words and phrases that have been around for ages.
It's our submissive willingness to conform to this ridiculous load of # that they keep subjecting us to, that is fuelling the flames.

we accept it, like obedient little subjects and they keep introducing more and more.
I heard recently that on forms, the title of Mrs was to be replaced by Ms !!
WHY ???
Is being married now taboo??
Is it discrimination against single people ??


and i've just dug my daughters old Golly out the loft----
Me and Golliwog here are going to have soooooo much fun !!!!



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 01:51 PM
link   
If I may throw a little 5 cent in.

As a black female I can tell you the only thing offensive about the doll is the history behind it

To address the term black.

In black culture we tend to pull the race card to make up for our own laziness, and the feeling that the world owes us everything because we were put down, also very rarely in the media are blacks portrayed in a very good manner My personal opinion is Hey rise above it, work extra hard. I personally find nothing wrong with saying Blackboard or anything with the word black in it. I wouldn't find it as racist because you are talking about everyday objects. Now if you were to use it in a manner offensive to me. We would have a war of words.

Yes I would be offended if there was a KKK doll or any doll with a race under tone to it

But with that said and done. We need to be able to teach our children tolerance and explain.


Also. Negro is outdated please use another word.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join